Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
For PvE, Old Ways are Best
pgt1027
Member
Or maybe more accurately, old direction is best.
And what I mean by that is PvE that tries to follow the general feeling of tabletop RPGs rather than hack and slash or ARPGs. What that means in a general sense is enemies that are much tougher and are individually a much bigger threat, but also fewer in number. For soloing non-elites, the sweet spot seems to be that fighting one enemy of your same level is fairly easy and reliable, fighting two is doable for most classes, but might leaving you sweating a bit and if you get attacked by three you need to run. No elite should be solo-able. The difficulty of the elites should naturally rise as you progress through the game and, by endgame, they should practically be mini-bosses in their own right and, if not shut down in some way by the players, most elite pulls will wipe the floor with the party. This means the party has to attempt to shut them down in some way, which invites the greatest potential for chaos.
One of the advantages that PvP and versus multiplayer games have in general over PvE is that your enemies are players, and players provide both an element of unpredictability and chaos. The best multiplayer games are those that emphasize this and make the best use of it, ensuring to the best degree that they can that no two games are the same, and they do this by giving players plenty of opportunities to shake things up. While there's potential in creating a more chaotic environment to shake things up, the surest source of chaos in PvE is still going to be the players themselves, and the longest lasting and most engaging PvE is going to be the kind gives players the greatest opportunity to shake things up so that doing PvE group content doesn't always go the same way. This is partially the reason for having super-powerful elites rather than trash stacks. There's tons of ways to shake things up with super-powerful elites, whereas when you've AoE'd down one trash stack, you've pretty much AoE'd them all.
Which leads me to suggest something that's pretty far from the "old ways" because I'm unaware of any MMO that's done this before, though there are games that have done it. Which is that I think that abilities should have altered effects based on if they're targeting players or NPCs. DOTA 2 actually has this. For instance, Crystal Maiden's Frostbite ability will root an NPC "creep" for 10 seconds, while it will only root a player for 1.5/2/2.5/3 seconds, or Enchantress's Enchant ability, which a mind control if targeted on a creep, but a slow if targeted on a player. I say this because I think crowd controls are a good way of shaking things up in PvE, but this is a primarily PvP focused MMO and I don't know if combat that's flush with powerful crowd controls makes for the greatest PvP experience.
There's a ton of crowd controls, all of which have the potential of shaking up an encounter. To name a few:
Stun - Completely shuts down the target, allowing the party to wale on them a bit, but usually has the biggest limitations since it's the most powerful
Sleep - The target is shut down completely, but "wakes up" if they take any damage
Root - Renders the target unable to move, completely disabling melee enemies if you keep your distance
Silence - Prevents the target from casting, potentially disabling casters
Blind - Reduces chance to hit and may shut down ranged attacks entirely
Hideous Laughter - A target is shut down similar to a stun, but has a chance every tick to resist the effect every tick, which goes up the more they're hit
Fear/Terror - Depending on the effect, the target may start to run in random directions or in the opposite direction of the caster. May be dangerous to use on intelligent enemies as they will attempt to call for help.
Charm - Make an enemy temporarily join your side. Usually only works on "less intelligent" enemies like animals.
Mind Control - Temporarily turn an enemy into a battle pet.
Banish - The enemy is taken out of the fight, but they're completely invulnerable for the duration
Baleful Polymorph - The enemy is turned into another creature, typically one that is far less threatening.
Turn Undead - A crowd control that doesn't work on most enemy types, but the enemy types it does work on are typically immune to most crowd controls
And it goes on. With 64 classes, I think not spreading out unique PvE crowd controls among them is a missed opportunity.
Though, crowd controls aren't the end-all, be-all. Giving any kind of unique contribution to the flow of PvE encounters, between 64 classes you have a huge number of potential party compositions and, consequently, the potential to have unique PvE experience by class composition alone. Another way to do this is giving different tank classes slightly different ways of mitigating threat and damage.
The last thing I wanted to add is that dungeons and raids should feel much more like tests of endurance that requires you to expend consumables. It should feel like an accomplishment just having gotten to the boss room. I say this partially because this means more consumables being used by players which helps drive the player economy.
And what I mean by that is PvE that tries to follow the general feeling of tabletop RPGs rather than hack and slash or ARPGs. What that means in a general sense is enemies that are much tougher and are individually a much bigger threat, but also fewer in number. For soloing non-elites, the sweet spot seems to be that fighting one enemy of your same level is fairly easy and reliable, fighting two is doable for most classes, but might leaving you sweating a bit and if you get attacked by three you need to run. No elite should be solo-able. The difficulty of the elites should naturally rise as you progress through the game and, by endgame, they should practically be mini-bosses in their own right and, if not shut down in some way by the players, most elite pulls will wipe the floor with the party. This means the party has to attempt to shut them down in some way, which invites the greatest potential for chaos.
One of the advantages that PvP and versus multiplayer games have in general over PvE is that your enemies are players, and players provide both an element of unpredictability and chaos. The best multiplayer games are those that emphasize this and make the best use of it, ensuring to the best degree that they can that no two games are the same, and they do this by giving players plenty of opportunities to shake things up. While there's potential in creating a more chaotic environment to shake things up, the surest source of chaos in PvE is still going to be the players themselves, and the longest lasting and most engaging PvE is going to be the kind gives players the greatest opportunity to shake things up so that doing PvE group content doesn't always go the same way. This is partially the reason for having super-powerful elites rather than trash stacks. There's tons of ways to shake things up with super-powerful elites, whereas when you've AoE'd down one trash stack, you've pretty much AoE'd them all.
Which leads me to suggest something that's pretty far from the "old ways" because I'm unaware of any MMO that's done this before, though there are games that have done it. Which is that I think that abilities should have altered effects based on if they're targeting players or NPCs. DOTA 2 actually has this. For instance, Crystal Maiden's Frostbite ability will root an NPC "creep" for 10 seconds, while it will only root a player for 1.5/2/2.5/3 seconds, or Enchantress's Enchant ability, which a mind control if targeted on a creep, but a slow if targeted on a player. I say this because I think crowd controls are a good way of shaking things up in PvE, but this is a primarily PvP focused MMO and I don't know if combat that's flush with powerful crowd controls makes for the greatest PvP experience.
There's a ton of crowd controls, all of which have the potential of shaking up an encounter. To name a few:
Stun - Completely shuts down the target, allowing the party to wale on them a bit, but usually has the biggest limitations since it's the most powerful
Sleep - The target is shut down completely, but "wakes up" if they take any damage
Root - Renders the target unable to move, completely disabling melee enemies if you keep your distance
Silence - Prevents the target from casting, potentially disabling casters
Blind - Reduces chance to hit and may shut down ranged attacks entirely
Hideous Laughter - A target is shut down similar to a stun, but has a chance every tick to resist the effect every tick, which goes up the more they're hit
Fear/Terror - Depending on the effect, the target may start to run in random directions or in the opposite direction of the caster. May be dangerous to use on intelligent enemies as they will attempt to call for help.
Charm - Make an enemy temporarily join your side. Usually only works on "less intelligent" enemies like animals.
Mind Control - Temporarily turn an enemy into a battle pet.
Banish - The enemy is taken out of the fight, but they're completely invulnerable for the duration
Baleful Polymorph - The enemy is turned into another creature, typically one that is far less threatening.
Turn Undead - A crowd control that doesn't work on most enemy types, but the enemy types it does work on are typically immune to most crowd controls
And it goes on. With 64 classes, I think not spreading out unique PvE crowd controls among them is a missed opportunity.
Though, crowd controls aren't the end-all, be-all. Giving any kind of unique contribution to the flow of PvE encounters, between 64 classes you have a huge number of potential party compositions and, consequently, the potential to have unique PvE experience by class composition alone. Another way to do this is giving different tank classes slightly different ways of mitigating threat and damage.
The last thing I wanted to add is that dungeons and raids should feel much more like tests of endurance that requires you to expend consumables. It should feel like an accomplishment just having gotten to the boss room. I say this partially because this means more consumables being used by players which helps drive the player economy.
1
Comments
But having to face enemies of strength comparable to mine, makes me feel epic. With a game like ashes were the lore and roleplay matter, winning a 2v1 or 3v1 should be a big deal.
As for killing groups vs solo, if we can take a group then groups are killed. If its solo its not a problem. I feel variation is key though.
1) The obvious Aggro Pull, which casters should be extremely squishy, so taking a mob hit is a big chunk of dmg.
2) AOE related spells is a channel. Let's assume max channel duration is 8 seconds.
1st second = 5% damage
2nd second = 5% damage
3rd second = 10% damage
4th second = 10% damage
5th second = 10% damage
6th second = 10% damage
7th second = 20% damage
8th second = 30% damage
so damage output starts low and you will end up getting the full damage on a full cast and the bigger chunk of damage on the last 2 second. It will still consume a large chunk of mana the second you cast.
Therefor you may aggro on the first two second and get interrupted by the 3rd second or 4th second, doing maybe 40-50% damage.
3) Interruption is take any single point of dmg. So NPC mobs can do a aoe stomp, snap aggro random player with a range attack. These snap targets should have a animaiton tell, so players will need to know to cast channels AFTER a snap to be safe, if not, you risk getting interrupted.
So go ahead and try to aoe farm, chances are your gonna aggro and get interrupted and die. Now if you wait patiently, allow the tank to build aggro and begin to channel when a NPC mob is at 70% hp, then you have a VERY REAL chance of completing. Hopefully you got a good tank and a good healer who isnt pulling aggro keeping him up to do so. This would be viable with lower level mob tiers as oppsed of trying to rain down on higher lvl mobs.
Action gameplay automatically makes the user feel more engaged, in comparison to a skill based tab target system that you're used to in PvE it's like driving in a car at 50mph on a 30mph road, it has your attention and it's thrilling where as the latter you're driving at 20mph or under and looking around, maybe bite your nails etc. Obviously many conditions can come into play in the form of buffs/debuffs constantly needing to be applied, many cc's coming into play etc but these showcase more of the strength of the system, not of yourself.
The mmorpg genre disappeared from the "popular gaming genre's" after 2010 not because they were lacking content/new ideas/passion etc, they fell in popularity because they cannot meet enough octane action in comparison to the competition. You might say you don't care about the masses because of IQ averages or the youth is ill experienced and obsessed by graphics but there is the reality of what you suggest not being good enough even for an audience tailored to it due to other passionate devs and genres (only the passionate and obsessed mmorpg fans will stay).
If AoC is a game lacking mechanically with not even a glimmer of "hack and slash" or high octane combat, I will leave it and stick to the likes of SF6 and Tekken 8 or perhaps a company that can redo League of Legends magic but without the corporate bs and ruin it. Steven has stated that there's 64 classes and that will take some time to get right for the masses ready to chew each others throats off in the "LF group" department including having pretty good and feel good looking gameplay to meet the needs of a game coming into 2025, it CANNOT be a game prior to 2010 and you if think that, you might as well wear a flat cap now and make some fictional grand kids if you haven't got any.
Bare in mind, I've played Ultima Online and think that's a pretty fun game before you judge me.
I think this is remedied partially by what I just said. Having a smaller number of much tougher enemies.
I disagree with this entirely. The reason why MMORPGs have declined in the last decade is because they've tried more and more to broaden their audience by being less like MMORPGs. What you're left with is a genre that doesn't really appeal to anyone except a dwindling niche of people who hopped on to the MMO craze of the Aughts. Sometimes, trying to get the CoD audience isn't the right move.
I also disagree that what players want is necessarily super high-octane hack 'n' slash combat, and I think this can be fairly proved by the popularity of From Software's titles. Dark Souls and its family of games are notorious for their difficulty, but they're hardly high-octane hack 'n' slash games where you fight a million enemies at once. You typically only fight a relatively small number of enemies at a time, and the combat is less about how many buttons you're pushing or how fast you're pushing those buttons, but about when you're pushing your buttons and how you're using your resources.
EQ - your lvl 1 vs a lvl 1 skeleton and it's legit 50/50 chance of you dying. Throughout the entire EQ game, YOU DO NOT SOLO or even dare to take on something of equal level as you, as that was pretty much a 70% chance of you dying.
I suspect this was also true in L1/L2
WoW flipped it and allowed you to be capable of killing an equal level mob, but a lvl 1 or 2 higher was 60-80% chance of death for most classes.
every other mmo - treated their npc with disrespect and created solo games as you are kratos.
I'm aware of that. I just meant that you were originally supposed to be a normal dude in a fantasy world, not that MMOs originally had that type of balance.
At least when I was checking a thing for this forum, I needed to lvl up my char a bit and died twice to mobs on lvl6